Hi Matthias,
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 10:53 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
By now, development
is well under way, and we've already made good progress on some of the
goals that we've set ourselves for 2.26 (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals).
I'm no native english speaker, but I don't think under
Sorry, that mail meant to be private ...
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 10:06 +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote:
Hi Matthias,
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 10:53 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
By now, development
is well under way, and we've already made good progress on some of the
goals that we've set
Luca Ferretti wrote:
Current version is 2.4.3[1] and I know a Python update was yet discussed
in past, but please also consider:
* libproxy (suggested for 2.26) ask for python = 2.5
* gobject-introspection (needed by gnome-shell) ask for python =
2.5
* other
Hi Christian!
The tentative plan for notification-daemon and libnotify is to move them
into SVN and switch over to Bugzilla. I'm then hoping to get someone to act
as a co-maintainer for this. There will be a formal code review process for
these modules, using a Review Board installation I'm
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 4:06 AM, Xavier Bestel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm no native english speaker, but I don't think under the hood means
what the guy who wrote that think it means.
For me, looking under the hood means having a peak at how it works. In
GnomeGoals context it looks like guy
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 01:32:30PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
There were no objections, so let's celebrate Python 3.0 release with
updating the minimum Python version to be 2.5.
Still will break the buildbot on RHEL5 (never found bootstrap Python to
work with x86_64).
--
Regards,
Olav
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 01:32:30PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
There were no objections, so let's celebrate Python 3.0 release with
updating the minimum Python version to be 2.5.
Still will break the buildbot on RHEL5
Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 01:32:30PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
There were no objections, so let's celebrate Python 3.0 release with
updating the minimum Python version to be 2.5.
Still will break the buildbot on RHEL5 (never found bootstrap Python to
work with
The GNOME Bugzilla is still using 2.20. Current stable upstream is at
3.2. The stable version has several benefits, but overall:
* no crappy table locking, while still allowing full text indexing
(table locking causes many performance problems)
* Upstream supported XMLRPC (not perfect, but
Since the year-end stats won't be immediately available, can we wait
until just after the new year to do any migrations? Let's let someone
run that report and send out an email with the contents first. That
way we won't care if that feature is missing for another 12 months.
- Martin
On Thu, Dec
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GNOME Bugzilla is still using 2.20. Current stable upstream is at
3.2. The stable version has several benefits, but overall:
* no crappy table locking, while still allowing full text indexing
(table locking causes
Hi Olav,
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 17:00 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
For that the proposal is that the following is not part of the initial
upgraded bgo:
* The points system
* index.cgi UI mods
* Making a new favicon
* The infomessages on show_bug.cgi
* Layout modifications for attachment
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GNOME Bugzilla is still using 2.20. Current stable upstream is at
3.2. The stable version has several benefits, but overall:
* no crappy table locking, while still allowing full text indexing
(table locking causes
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:19:28PM +0100, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
Hi Olav,
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 17:00 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
For that the proposal is that the following is not part of the initial
upgraded bgo:
* The points system
* index.cgi UI mods
* Making a new favicon
*
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:17:01AM -0500, Martin Meyer wrote:
Since the year-end stats won't be immediately available, can we wait
until just after the new year to do any migrations? Let's let someone
run that report and send out an email with the contents first. That
way we won't care if that
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:31:28AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
One question I'd have: are there any steps that can be/will be taken
to minimize the pain during the inevitable next upgrade? Commitment to
getting changes upstream, use of DVCS, etc.? Getting back to trunk
Upstream: I'll check again.
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GNOME Bugzilla is still using 2.20. Current stable upstream is at
3.2. The stable version has several benefits, but overall:
* no crappy table
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:31:28AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
One question I'd have: are there any steps that can be/will be taken
to minimize the pain during the inevitable next upgrade? Commitment to
getting changes
Olav Vitters cited:
* Layout modifications for attachment table and the login box
* Patch and keyword emblems
* show_bug.cgi UI re-ordering float-right box
* Asking people if they've provided the NEEDINFO info.
Are the features I find important in my usage of our Bugzilla.
Do you know
but please focus on what you use: Is the reduced functionality trade-off
acceptable if in the end we get a newer Bugzilla and the feature back?
Note that likely some things will work in different ways etc.
As long as stock answers and simple-dup-finder functionality get a high
priority so they
Le jeudi 04 décembre 2008, à 17:00 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit :
Is above acceptable?
The current situation is a dead-end, so I'm all for moving, even if we
lose some stuff.
We'll eventually reimplement stuff that is important to us, and
hopefully, we'll be able to do it in a more
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 06:14:04PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
Olav Vitters cited:
* Layout modifications for attachment table and the login box
* Patch and keyword emblems
* show_bug.cgi UI re-ordering float-right box
* Asking people if they've provided the NEEDINFO info.
Are
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Cosimo Cecchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- patch review status
Maybe time to investigate Review Board or the like?
- simple-dup-finder
Suggest we move crashes out of Bugzilla and into a separate database
(like Socorro). Bugzilla should only be for hand-written
Le jeudi 04 décembre 2008, à 12:56 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Cosimo Cecchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- simple-dup-finder
Suggest we move crashes out of Bugzilla and into a separate database
(like Socorro). Bugzilla should only be for hand-written input
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 06:42:36PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 04 décembre 2008, à 17:00 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit :
Is above acceptable?
The current situation is a dead-end, so I'm all for moving, even if we
lose some stuff.
Yeah, but I need to know:
* what priority should the
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 18:19 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote:
but please focus on what you use: Is the reduced functionality trade-off
acceptable if in the end we get a newer Bugzilla and the feature back?
Note that likely some things will work in different ways etc.
As long as stock answers
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is above acceptable?
Patch review status and patch emblems and their interaction with
product pages are essential for my ability to manage GLib and GTK+.
Getting those back as soon as possible would be important. And while
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 17:44 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
I am not sure what the timeframe is for every feature btw. The intention
is to order them by need, and deliver in multiple stages. So some
features might be missing for 6 months, some only for a month. Further,
some might be available
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 12:56 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Cosimo Cecchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- patch review status
Maybe time to investigate Review Board or the like?
I haven't tried that kind of programs, but I think that any solution for
reviewing
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Cosimo Cecchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- simple-dup-finder
Suggest we move crashes out of Bugzilla and into a separate database
(like Socorro). Bugzilla should only be for hand-written input from
technical people.
Technically, bug-buddy is already capable
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 14:21 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
You don't need full symbols for crash information to be useful. It
certainly helps, but we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the
good there.
Right, but I don't think there's an intermediate solution between
resolving the crash trace
Hey folks. I'm Max, from the Bugzilla Project. I also have a
company called Everything Solved, and we'd be the ones doing the
upgrade work if it happens.
The fact of who *I* am (Everything Solved) is not confidential
at the moment. Only the funder's identity is confidential until
Hi!
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le lundi 17 novembre 2008, à 17:56 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :
Owen Taylor wrote:
Question for gnome-infrastructure: How do we move forward on it? Do we
have an easier alternative at hand then just writing
Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
So you already on it or you are waiting for someone to get you th
list of svn accounts? If latter is the case, It's pretty easily doable
using git but unfortunately the dates in the git repos created through
git-svn aren't correct (or it seems to be the case).
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
So you already on it or you are waiting for someone to get you th
list of svn accounts? If latter is the case, It's pretty easily doable
using git but unfortunately the dates in the git
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good timing. I'm working on it. Have a draft of the survey itself. I'm
installing a PHP-based survey software now. Then will pass the survey by
board, r-t, and sysadmin team, then go about asking people to fill in.
No progress yet. Been too busy with work-related things and the holidays.
Christian
--
Christian Hammond - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VMware, Inc.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 5:56 AM, Frederic Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Christian!
The tentative plan for notification-daemon and libnotify is to
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:25:58PM -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Good timing. I'm working on it. Have a draft of the survey itself. I'm
installing a PHP-based survey software now. Then will pass the survey by
board, r-t, and sysadmin team, then go about asking people to fill in. Have
not
Hi Max,
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey folks. I'm Max, from the Bugzilla Project. I also have a
company called Everything Solved, and we'd be the ones doing the
upgrade work if it happens.
This is great news. :-)
All the
39 matches
Mail list logo
